EC on the glorification of Mladić in Montenegro: There is no place for this in the EU or among candidate countries
The European Commission has criticized several Montenegrin politicians and officials from ruling parties for praising the legacy of Ratko Mladić, a war criminal convicted by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia for his role in the Srebrenica genocide. The Commission emphasized that honoring such individuals contradicts European values and is incompatible with EU membership. Among those criticized was Andrija Mandić, president of Montenegro's Assembly and leader of the New Serbian Democracy party, who expressed condolences to Mladić's family on social media. In response, Montenego's President Jakov Milatović condemned any attempt to relativize wartime crimes and stressed the importance of respecting international court rulings. Other officials, including Foreign Minister Ervin Ibrahimović and Deputy Prime Minister Nik Đeljošaj, also denounced the glorification of Mladić, noting that it reflects current values held by individuals. However, the ruling party, Movement Europe led by Premier Miloš Spajić, did not comment on the issue.
Ratko Mladić, former commander of the Main Staff of the Army of the Republic of Serbian Krajina and convicted war criminal, died at the age of 84 in The Hague. He was sentenced to life imprisonment in 2017 by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) for genocide, crimes against humanity, and violations of the laws and customs of war. His conviction was upheld in 2021 by the Appeals Chamber of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Matters. Mladić was found guilty, among other charges, of the genocide in Srebrenica in 1995, including the killing, persecution, extermination, and forced displacement of civilians, as well as a campaign of shelling and sniper attacks against Sarajevo residents. After his death, journalist Dženana Karup Druško recalled her experience on the first day of his trial in The Hague, where she sat close to him. Druško described sitting in the front row reserved for journalists, with only glass separating her from Mladić. She wrote that it was a significant day for her, marking the trial of the commander of the Army of the Republic of Serbian Krajina after years of his evasion and the atrocities he committed in Bosnia and Herzegovina. During the presentation of the indictment by prosecutor Dermot Groome, Druško observed Mladić's reactions, curious about how he would behave facing accusations of crimes in Bosnia and Herzegovina. According to her account, Mladić listened coldly, occasionally glancing around the courtroom. At one point, their eyes met. She stated she did not want to look away from such a criminal. The situation changed when the prosecutor began speaking about Srebrenica. According to Druško, murmurs, sighs, and cries were heard in the audience. She claimed that Mladić looked coldly at the public and cynically ran his finger over his throat, a gesture interpreted by those present as a simulation of slaughter. Among victims and their families, there were intense reactions, leading the judge to interrupt the proceedings and declare a recess. She recalled standing up to leave, with Mladić also rising and heading toward the exit, leaving them only a few steps apart. He pointed at her and raised his thumb. Druško was shocked by this encounter. She noted that the man who had just moments before shown how he would kill again the victims of Srebrenica had done so. She was aware that any reaction of hers could be perceived as disrespect towards the court and that she could be expelled from the courtroom. However, she could not overlook it. Druško described what she did after meeting Mladić. She moved closer to Vlada Marić, who stood beside her, to be out of the judges' sight, and then showed Mladić the middle finger. She called it a clear message of her disdain for him. Her lawyers immediately reacted, lamenting to the judges. Foreign journalists also noticed something happening and approached to ask what had occurred. Having enough journalistic experience, she said nothing happened. She grabbed Vlada’s hand and quickly left. That day, she was not supposed to be the news. The news was the beginning of the trial of Ratko Mladić. Mladić’s trial began in May 2012, and the first-instance judgment by ICTY was delivered on November 22, 2017. He was sentenced to life imprisonment. The Appeals Chamber of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Matters confirmed the life sentence and key conclusions of the first-instance judgment in 2021. The court determined his responsibility for a series of crimes committed during the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, including the genocide in Srebrenica, where more than 8,000 Bosnian Muslim men and boys were killed in July 1995. Mladić had evaded capture for years after the war. He was arrested in Serbia in May 2011 and handed over to The Hague. Now he is in Serbia. The European Commission commented on reports that several Montenegrin politicians and officials from ruling parties praised the person and actions of Ratko Mladić, stating that praising war criminals is contrary to European values and has no place in the European Union or among candidates for membership. In response to questions from Podgorica newspaper Vijesti, the European Commission reminded that Mladić served a life sentence for crimes against humanity and genocide in Srebrenica and was a war criminal declared guilty by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and sentenced to life imprisonment in 2017. This verdict was confirmed in the appeal process before the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Matters in 2021. Among Montenegrin officials who praised Mladić, President of the Assembly of Montenegro and leader of the New Serbian Democracy (NSD) Andrija Mandić stood out, saying he sent condolences to the family in his name and in the name of NSD "on the occasion of the death of his father, General Ratko Mladić." On Mandić's post, Montenegrin President Jakov Milatović said that the relationship with the family of the deceased cannot be an excuse for relativizing war crimes and emphasized that Montenegro must respect the judgments of international courts, clearly condemn war crimes, preserve the dignity of victims and their families, and reject all glorification and relativization of war crimes. Both Montenegrin Minister of Foreign Affairs and President of the Bosniak Party (BS) Ervin Ibrahimović and Deputy Prime Minister of Montenegro from the Albanian party faction Nik Đeljošaj condemned the glorification of war criminals. They stated that glorifying a properly convicted war criminal, alive or dead, deserves only contempt. They added that everything else is hidden glorification of the criminal, crime, genocide, and genocidal policies. Ibrahimović and Đeljošaj sit in the government where at least four ministers and one Deputy Prime Minister belong to the New Serbian Democracy led by Andrija Mandić. The ruling Europe Now movement led by Prime Minister Milojko Spajić did not comment. Mladić's trial started in May 2012, and the first-instance judgment by ICTY was delivered on November 22, 2017. He was sentenced to life imprisonment. The Appeals Chamber of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Matters confirmed the life sentence and key conclusions of the first-instance judgment in 2021. The court determined his responsibility for a series of crimes committed during the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, including the genocide in Srebrenica, where more than 8,000 Bosnian Muslim men and boys were killed in July 1995. Mladić had evaded capture for years after the war. He was arrested in Serbia in May 2011 and handed over to The Hague. Now he is in Serbia.
Go to the primary sources (1)
The official sources this coverage is built on. Read them directly to bypass framing.
Novinarka Dženana Karup Druško, koja je pratila suđenje bivšeg vojnozapovjednika Ratka Mladića u Haagu, opisala je detaljan incident tokom procesa. Mladić, koji je bio osuđen za više zločina u Bosni i Hercegovini uključujući genocid u Srebrenici, bio je prisutan u sudnici, a Druško ga je posmatrala iz bliske udaljenosti. Tokom iznošenja optužbe, Mladić je izgledao hladan, a njihovi su pogledi se susretali. Kada je tužitelj govorio o Srebrenici, Mladić je demonstrirao gestu koja je bila shvacena kao simulacija klanja, što je izazvalo burnu reakciju u publiku. Sudac je prekinuo raspravu i odredio stanku. Nakon toga, Druško je imala direktni kontakt s Mladićem, a pokazala mu je srednji prst kao znak prezira.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the encounter between Druško and Mladić through the lens of moral judgment and justice, emphasizing the victim perspective and the symbolic act of defiance by the journalist. The narrative highlights the emotional impact on the victims' families and portrays Mladić as a symbol of罪
Why factuality (90): This article provides detailed information about Mladić’s trial at the ICTY, including his 2017 conviction and 2021 confirmation. It mentions the charges of genocide, crimes against humanity, and violations of international humanitarian law, which are consistent with official records. The reference
Why objectivity (55): While the article has some emotional elements, such as the journalist’s personal recollection and her description of Mladić’s demeanor, it generally maintains a more neutral tone compared to the first article. It reports facts about the trial and Mladić’s legal status without overtly condemning him,
The European Commission has criticized several Montenegrin politicians and officials from ruling parties for praising the legacy of Ratko Mladić, a war criminal convicted by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia for his role in the Srebrenica genocide. The Commission emphasized that honoring such individuals contradicts European values and is incompatible with EU membership. Among those criticized was Andrija Mandić, president of Montenegro's Assembly and leader of the New Serbian Democracy party, who expressed condolences to Mladić's family on social media. In response, Montenego's President Jakov Milatović condemned any attempt to relativize wartime crimes and stressed the importance of respecting international court rulings. Other officials, including Foreign Minister Ervin Ibrahimović and Deputy Prime Minister Nik Đeljošaj, also denounced the glorification of Mladić, noting that it reflects current values held by individuals. However, the ruling party, Movement Europe led by Premier Miloš Spajić, did not comment on the issue.
Bias read (Center): The article presents the European Commission's stance against glorifying war criminals and includes responses from multiple Montenegrin officials across different political factions. It does not favor one side over another but reports on the controversy objectively, quoting various perspectives.
Why factuality (85): The article accurately reports the European Commission's stance against glorification of war criminals, citing specific details about Ratko Mladić's crimes and his conviction by the ICTY. It also mentions Andrija Mandić's public expression of condolences and the response from President Milatović. Ho
Why objectivity (65): The article presents the European Commission's position as a neutral authority but frames the issue through the lens of EU values and membership criteria. While it reports facts objectively, there is a subtle implication that Mandić's actions are politically problematic, which could be seen as sligh
The article commemorates the death of Ratko Mladić, a war criminal convicted of genocide, emphasizing his role in wartime atrocities during the Bosnian War. It criticizes the glorification of such figures by young people and highlights Mladić's brutal actions across several cities, including Srebrenica, where he was ultimately sentenced for genocide. The piece notes how international community allowed him to avoid military defeat in Bosnia and escape punishment for crimes committed in Croatia, where he began his violent campaign. The article underscores the lasting legacy of hatred and destruction associated with Mladić’s ideology.
Bias read (Progressive): The article strongly condemns Mladić's actions, frames them as symbols of cowardice, destruction, and hatred, and criticizes those who might glorify such individuals. The tone is unequivocally critical of war criminals and their ideologies, aligning with left-leaning values of justice, human rights,
Why factuality (85): The article presents a highly negative portrayal of Ratko Mladić, calling him a 'ratni zločinac' and emphasizing his role in war crimes and genocide. While it aligns with the general historical narrative of Mladić's guilt as established by the ICTY, it lacks specific citations or references to prima
Why objectivity (30): The tone is strongly condemnatory and emotionally charged, using terms like 'ratni zločinac' and 'smrti.' It frames Mladić solely as a criminal without presenting any counterpoints or alternative perspectives. The article uses loaded language and focuses exclusively on his wrongdoing, showing little
The European Commission has condemned the glorification of war criminals by some Montenegrin politicians, particularly those associated with the ruling New Serbian Democracy (NSD) party. The commission stated that such actions contradict European values and are unacceptable both within the EU and among candidate countries. The focus was on the case of Ratko Mladić, a former Yugoslav army commander convicted of crimes against humanity and genocide, who received a life sentence in 2017 and had his conviction upheld in 2021. Montenegro’s president Jakov Milatović criticized the glorification, emphasizing the need to respect international court rulings and reject any form of relativization of wartime atrocities. Several other officials, including Foreign Minister Ervin Ibrahimović and Deputy Prime Minister Nik Đeljošaj, also denounced the glorification, noting that it reflects current societal values. The ruling NSD party leader Andrija Mandić, however, expressed condolences to the family of Mladić upon the death of his father, General Ratko Mladić.
Bias read (Center): While the article highlights criticism from various officials and the European Commission regarding the glorification of a war criminal, it presents multiple perspectives without overtly favoring one side. It includes reactions from both the president and opposition figures, maintaining a balanced,
Why factuality (80): The article provides accurate information about the European Commission's statement regarding the glorification of war criminals and Mandić's public expression of condolences. It includes relevant quotes from Milatović and Ibrahimović. However, it cuts off mid-sentence, missing some contextual detai
Why objectivity (60): While the article remains largely factual, it has a somewhat critical tone towards Mandić's actions, especially in referencing Ibrahimović's strong condemnation. This suggests a mild editorial lean towards condemning the glorification of war criminals.
How each side covered it
The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.
progressive
center
conservative
★
How each side covered it
Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.
Croatia
